PARLIAMENT | PARTY | GRASSROOTS

Red Alert

Archive for the ‘digital’ Category

Just do it

Posted by Clare Curran on December 27th, 2011

I meant to write about this a few days ago.

US comedian Louis CK (I hadn’t heard of him, but he seems pretty popular) decided to produce a good version of his latest live show and make it available online for $5.

Nek Minnit (well 12 days later) he made $1 million.

The Age reported today:

Comedian Louis CK has proved a point: People are willing to pay a reasonable amount of money for DRM-free content from a performer they love, even though it would be trivial for them to pirate the same content for free.

Twelve days ago, Louis CK decided to skip the distribution, DRM, ads and everything else that goes into marketing and sale of a video, and simply offer the video of his latest performance on his website for $US5.

It took four days for Louis to earn $US200,000, and another 8 days to earn a whopping $US1 million.

It  blows out the water the view that content has to be locked up with laws to enforce it because too many people will only steal it. In fact people will pay money to get access to new content. If the price is right and the product is what they want.

Louis CK posted a blog saying he would keep just $220,000 from his $1m.

He said:

So I’m breaking the million into four pieces.

the first 250k is going to pay back what the special cost to produce and the website to build.

The second 250k is going back to my staff and the people who work for me on the special and on my show. I’m giving them a big fat bonus.

The third 280k is going to a few different charities. They are listed below in case you’d like to donate to them also. Some of these i learned about through friends, some were recomended through twitter.

That leaves me with 220k for myself. Some of that will pay my rent and will care for my children. The rest I will do terrible, horrible things with and none of that is any of your business. In any case, to me, 220k is enough out of a million.

I had a quick look at Louis CK’s stuff. Here is is a clip on Youtube (not the $5 version). Pretty out there, but worth paying for. I think the business model is pretty obvious. It’s just a pity that he had to spend the money himself upfront to develop the tools to distribute his work.

Imagine if that technology was readily available to artists for a small fee. Imagine if the New Zealand tech industry was encouraged to go for it.

Another point to end on. Digital Rights Management (DRM) is the technology used by hardware manufacturers, publishers, copyright holders and individuals with the intent to limit the use of digital content and devices after sale.

Companies such as Amazon, AOL, Apple Inc., the BBC, Microsoft and Sony use digital rights management. In 1998 the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) was passed in the United States to impose criminal penalties on those who make available technologies whose primary purpose and function is to circumvent content protection technologies.[1] The use of digital rights management is controversial. Corporations claim that DRM is necessary to fight copyright infringement online and that it can help the copyright holder maintain artistic control[2] or ensure continued revenue streams.[3] Those opposed to DRM argue that there is no evidence that DRM helps prevent copyright infringement and that DRM helps big business stifle innovation and competition.[4] Proponents argue that digital locks should be considered necessary to prevent intellectual property from being stolen, just as physical locks are needed to prevent personal property from being stolen.

I thought it was interesting that I learnt about Louis CK’s online  business endeavours through twitter via the ABC’s managing director Mark Scott who tweeted:

“The comedian (is) providing lessons in the future of digital rights management”.

Prescience from the head of Australia’s public broadcaster. It would be good to have a bit more debate about it here.

Filed under: Arts and Culture, broadcasting, comms & IT, digital, economy
16 Comments

If we want to be a digital nation, we need digital Kiwis

Posted by Clare Curran on November 11th, 2011

Kids who don’t have access to computers at home and not much access at school will benefit from Labour’s education policy released yesterday by Phil Goff and Sue Moroney.

If we want a nation of digital Kiwis who make NZ a digital nation with decent paying jobs in the tech world, then all of us need access to the technology. It’s that simple.

New Zealand?s economic future lies in weightless exports. The future of the nation relies on Kiwi children becoming digital Kiwis. We can’t have kids leaving school without good digitial skills becasue they come from a  poor background where there’s no computer at home and no money to connect to the internet. Or where their school can’t afford to buy computers or mobile devices for the kids.

Access to technology can help close the gap between rich and poor. The country must not have a digital divide. Labour believes some of our greatest innovation can come out of our most deprived areas. The new broadband network must not be a tool to entrench the divide between the haves and the have nots.

Computers in Homes (2020 Communications Trust) estimates that there are 100,000 families with dependent children who do not have access to a computer at home. Around 20% of New Zealand households currently do not have a computer. They are more likely to be one-parent households and from Maori and Pasifika backgrounds where children are unable to participate equitably in digital learning and using technology.

While programs such as Computers in Homes, Computer Clubhouse and Aotearoa People?s Network do great work in increasing digital literacy, their success is sporadic because of limited funding. Labour will boost that funding.

And to increase the connectedness and literacy for many New Zealand households is to leverage the education system by ensuring every child has access to a device. Labour’s education policy announced this:
 

Labour will invest $75 million over four years in “e-learning? for low-decile schools, with priority going to schools with year 7 -13 students and the capability to deliver an effective programme . This includes Government funding for students to have individual use of a mobile device.

$19 million per year is sufficient funding to ensure 31,000 year 7 to 13 students have individual use of a mobile device. When Labour takes office we will determine which schools are best placed to benefit from e-learning based on a number of factors. Priority will be given to low-decile schools with high levels of disengagement and/or low levels of academic achievement, as well as those schools that have staff prepared to lead an effective e-learning programme.

I visited the Enderley Computer Clubhouse in Hamilton yesterday. I saw kids from poor families who turn up every day after school because they can use hi tech equipment to create online games and make their own music clips and other things. These are kids with talent, who would have no way to access this hi tech equipment and might otherwise be roaming the streets. I can see a future for them. That could benefit the nation.

New Zealand needs more young innovators. We need the pathways for them to get from school into further learning and jobs that pay well. Let’s make the most of our kids. All of them.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: #OpenLabourNZ, #ownourfuture, comms & IT, digital, education
29 Comments

A new public broadcaster

Posted by Clare Curran on November 1st, 2011

1. There is no public television broadcaster in NZ. Our public broadcasting environment is depleted. Labour believes a strong, independent, free public media service  NOT driven by commercial interests is essential to an informed democracy.

2. A Labour Government will immediately start a debate to establish a new non-commercial public broadcaster. It will include the functions of Radio NZ and TVNZ7. It will consider other functions. So to be clear we will keep TVNZ7. Radio NZ will retain its autonomy. We will strengthen them and may add services. We will ensure the governance of the new broadcaster is more arms length from government.

3. It will exist in the digital environment. Therefore it spans the traditional broadcasting telco industry and internet realms. This is called convergence. Labour has already signalled a converged regulatory environment for broadcasting and telco sectors.

4. A public and industry (broadcasting and telco sectors) debate will take place on the final shape and funding mechanisms. There are a range of options to be canvassed. The debate is important because it will be a New Zealand broadcaster that belongs to all of us and is about us. The lack of a public broadcaster has been debated. The shape of a future one has not. That debate has been sorely missing.

4. We don’t anticipate any extra cost to the taxpayer. We will asking the sectors how they think it should be funded. The outcome could be a mix of options. We are not prejudging or anticipating the outcome of this. The debate hasn’t been had. Many stakeholders are keen to have it.

5. The debate will be concluded within a year and it is anticipated that decisions will be made and any regulatory and other changes underway.

This is a significant policy. It marks an important change towards a contemporary Kiwi approach to protecting and promoting our culture in the 21st Century. It’s a commitment not made lightly and it’s a commitment we will see through.

I hope you agree.

Filed under: #OpenLabourNZ, #ownourfuture, broadcasting, comms & IT, digital, media
10 Comments

Labour will establish a new, modern public broadcaster

Posted by Clare Curran on November 1st, 2011

Here’s the policy link.

It new, it’s modern. It’s not a we might do it, We will do it. We’ll have a debate first. Then we’ll decide the funding mechanism and the new shape. The policy sets out how we’ll do it.

Will blog further about it soon.

Filed under: #ownourfuture, broadcasting, comms & IT, digital
10 Comments

Thinking outside the square #2

Posted by Clare Curran on October 16th, 2011

There’s a fundamental shift in communications and media that’s blurring what used to be clear distinctions between telecommunications, broadcasting and the internet.

The digital environment is seeing computing and other information technologies, media content, and communication networks merging and transforming. Fast. It’s called convergence.

Steve Jobs turned a company that made computers (Apple Macs) into one that made music devices (iPods) iphones and iPads.

Google started off as a computer search engine. It developed gmail, a web browser (Chrome), then it moved into the smartphone business with its android operating system. As an agregator of news content across all platforms it is now starting to compete with existing news organisations and now it has entered the smart TV market with its Google  interactive TV product.

Newspapers now deliver their breaking news via websites and social media, often using video clips.

TVs are increasingly turning to the internet to deliver content as well as the traditional means. You can now send emails, access the internet and watch news and TV and even movies on your phone.

What used to be our state public television broadcaster TVNZ has signalled it wants to enter the pay TV market which is currently dominated by one player Sky. It already provides content through Sky. There’s no rules and there is an ongoing debate about the implications of deals done with networks to carry content over the Ultra Fast Broadband network.

As the technologies converge, a number of issues arise for policy makers around the networks that will be needed to carry both content produced inside New Zealand and which comes from outside the country.

Steven Joyce doesn’t seem to believe convergence is occuring

Labour does.

Australia is undertaking a landmark review of Australian media and communications regulation.

Canada has just released a regulatory framework for media ownership to address unfair competition.

Malaysia, the EU, the UK, Korea, Japan, Taiwan, South Africa… have all gone down this path.

Labour will release its ICT policy on Monday.

Our broadcasting policy will follow soon.

Tags:
Filed under: #OpenLabourNZ, #ownourfuture, comms & IT, digital
6 Comments

Thinking outside the square

Posted by Clare Curran on October 15th, 2011

Some important questions to ponder:

  • Should technology be a priority industry for growth?
  • Could New Zealand become a world leader in the use of digital technology, to transform New Zealand economically and socially?
  • Is a strong and vibrant ICT sector a platform to improve all areas of NZ’s economy and society.
  • Just how important is the digital environment as core infrastructure for the New Zealand of the future?

If it is, what do we need to do to get there

Labour will release its ICT policy on Monday.

I’ve always thought Information Communications Technology (ICT) was a bit of a cumbersome name. It’s time we called our policy something sexy

Filed under: #OpenLabourNZ, #ownourfuture, comms & IT, digital, technology
34 Comments

Can we work together on some things?

Posted by Clare Curran on July 4th, 2011

The internet was conceived on the ideas of equality and access. People sharing and making new things happen.

In the spirit of this, I participated in a panel discussion last Friday at NetHui in Auckland. The topic was  government and openness. What it might look like in 2020.

During the discussion I asked my fellow politicians on the panel, Nikki Kaye, National and Gareth Hughes, Green, if we could form a cross parliamentary group to see where we could find some commonalities on the important issues facing us in becoming more open.

They agreed. Our first meeting could be this week. We’ll keep you posted.

If you’d like to see the panel discussion click here

Tags: ,
Filed under: #OpenLabourNZ, comms & IT, democracy, digital, internet
6 Comments

One of the most powerful of speeches…

Posted by Clare Curran on July 3rd, 2011

Late last week I spent a day and a half at NetHui in Auckland. Couldn’t make the full 3 days. It’s a new initiative, organised by InternetNZ.

It will be an annual event. That all MPs should attend and all of you.

It was all about the internet. What it means for us. What the opportunities and the scary challenges are. And that it’s about equality.

Lawrence Lessig was the keynote speaker.

Some takeout messages:

  • Kids, dropouts, outsiders have been the innovators and have developed the major changes on the internet
  • The internet is about reviving a culture of passive consumption to re-creating a culture of sharing, participation and making new stuff.
  • The need for truth tellers about the network.
  • The enormous challenges for policy-makers and law makers. One of which is for politicians to move away from a culture of being funded  and therefore influenced by private interests. To halt law-making by lobbyists. And consider other ways.
  • How NZ could become a beacon of light in showing the way forward on many of the issues that arise because of the internet

If you watch nothing else for a while, watch his speech. It’s on Youtube in 3 parts.

Part 2 is here

Part 3 is here

Tags: , ,
Filed under: #OpenLabourNZ, comms & IT, community, copyright, democracy, digital, internet, politics
1 Comment

It’s time for a complete review of our copyright laws

Posted by Clare Curran on June 4th, 2011

I agree with this.

It’s time for a complete review of our IP laws in NZ.

UN Report Says Internet Three Strikes Laws Violate International Law
Friday June 03, 2011
The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression has released an important new report that examines freedom of expression on the Internet.  The report is very critical of rules such as graduated response/three strikes, arguing that such laws may violate the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Canada became a member in 1976). Moreover, the report expresses concerns with notice-and-takedown systems, noting that it is subject to abuse by both governments and private actors.

On the issue of graduated response, the report states:

he is alarmed by proposals to disconnect users from Internet access if they violate intellectual property rights. This also includes legislation based on the concept of “graduated response”, which imposes a series of penalties on copyright infringers that could lead to suspension of Internet service, such as the so-called “three strikes-law” in France and the Digital Economy Act 2010 of the United Kingdom.

Beyond the national level, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) has been proposed as a multilateral agreement to establish international standards on intellectual property rights enforcement. While the provisions to disconnect individuals from Internet access for violating the treaty have been removed from the final text of December 2010, the Special Rapporteur remains watchful about the treaty’s eventual implications for intermediary liability and the right to freedom of expression.

In light of these concerns, the report argues that the Internet disconnection is a disproportionate response, violates international law and such measures should be repealed in countries that have adopted them:

Filed under: comms & IT, copyright, digital, internet
18 Comments

The trashing of politics and media

Posted by Clare Curran on May 15th, 2011

I’ve been writing for a while about the degradation of quality media in this country and building a case for strengthening it.

I have also written at various times about how cynicism towards politics and politicians has become like a cancer in our society. That it creates distance and distrust between people and politicians and has made the practice of democracy somewhat of a farce.

A couple of weeks ago a former senior Australian politician, Lindsay Tanner released a book called Sideshow, dumbing down democracy, which delved into both these subjects. Lindsay was Minister of Finance in the Labor Government and unexpectedly resigned at the last election. I have enormous respect for him as a man and a politician.

He writes of the mass disillusionment with politics in Australia and describes how politicians have become increasingly robotic, with scripted stunts and gimicks.

He talks of the pressures on media to be competitive and the impact of technology-change which has squeezed out much of the commercial media’s ability to be serious and considered about national politics. Instead, commercial media has become a zone of ultra sensationalsim, personalities, celebrities, trivia and gimicks. And politicians have responded by becoming more defensive and robotic to protect themselves.

He says nobody is particularly to blame, it’s the market pressures. But that two crafts; politics and serious journalism, have been trashed in the process.

Sound familiar? I think it’s worse here in NZ  because we don’t have the diversity of media that Australia has. But the hunger for trivia is increasing.

And as Kris Faafoi said in the debate in parliament last week on the Bill that axes the TVNZ Charter, the news on TV is becoming less important than the ad breaks in between news items. One could sometimes say indistinguishable from ad breaks.

We need serious debate about these issues in our country. If you’re interested; listen to Lindsay Tanner being interviewed on Australian Sky News by political editor David Speers.

And then watch the ABC’s MediaWatch clip which lays out in frightening detail the subsequent media coverage of Tanner’s book launch, in precisely the way he predicted it would play out in the media. As an attack on the government of which he was previously a part. Despite him trying to generate discussion about how the media interacts with politics.

How do we get critical analysis and discussion back into our public discourse in this country? That’s a pretty important and urgent question I think. It’s unlikely to come through commercial broadcast media. That leaves the depleted public broadcast media. And print, which faces similar issues. The demise of NZPA has raised some critical issues for our news media generally as we  will soon no longer have a national news agency.

Do New Zealanders care? Jonathan Coleman, the undistinguished Minister of Broadcasting, thinks they don’t. He reckons we all want to exist on a diet of reality TV. Do we really? And what do we do when our news and reality TV become indistinguishable?

Tags:
Filed under: #OpenLabourNZ, broadcasting, comms & IT, democracy, digital, media
47 Comments

The terrible twos

Posted by Clare Curran on May 5th, 2011

2

Today Red Alert turns two.

It’s funny but we seem older. Not sure about wiser. But we are a credible and established force in the New Zealand political blogosphere.

Most Labour MPs blog . Most of us are active on facebook. Many of us are on Twitter. These are our real voices. We don’t always agree with each other, but we do share common values.

We’re focussed, we’re pretty tough and we have hearts. We also have ideas.

Most importantly we say what we think so we can talk to you; our readers, commenters, critics and supporters. Tell us what you’re thinking about us and don’t hold back (within reason).

What do you like about us, what do you want from us?

PS: And I promise the edit function on the comments is coming

Some facts:

  • 3,545 posts
  • 81,191 comments
  • Most posts: well who do you think? Trevor Mallard 1020
  • Next most posts: me on 519 (I’m a bit behind)
  • Newest poster: Annette King
  • Interesting new regular posts: Play of the Day, Tweet of the Week

PS: I forgot to thank my fellow moderators. Trevor, Grant and Chippie (Mr Hipkins). We work well together. We have occasional intense discussions, but we exercise our responsibility fairly and without prejudice (as long as you don’t cross the line). For those who disagree our moderation policy is here.

Tags: ,
Filed under: #OpenLabourNZ, Labour Party, Red Alert, blogs, comms & IT, digital, internet
28 Comments

Why Key needs to get offshore advice on broadband

Posted by Trevor Mallard on April 21st, 2011

I’ve known Bruce Parkes for years. Straightshooter. Like him. Always knew where he came from. Believed Telecom should use it’s superior market position to slow competitors entry.

But with the High Court judgement quoted below showing how he illegally tilted the playing field in Telecom’s favour he can not be the principal policy advisor on a plan which abolishes regulatory oversight of Telecom’s broadband. It gives them a blank cheque to overcharge much of the country for a decade.

Even before the court decision the sector was revolting. This revelation means that there needs to be a quick expert inquiry into both the decision to favour Telecom and the process that resulted in a very unusual decision.

Because of the vested interests involved the expert(s) will have to come from offshore.

The judgement said interalia:-

The senior Telecom executive named by High Court judge Rodney Hansen in his judgment penalising the telco for historic breaches to Commerce Act, is now a senior civil servant with oversight of the government’s broadband investments.

Bruce Parkes is currently Deputy Secretary at the Ministry of Economic Development for the Energy and Communications Branch. Among his responsibilities, according to his profile on the MED website, are ICT policy and the Ultra Fast Broadband plan. “In conjunction with Crown Fibre Holdings, this group will continue to implement work on the ultra-fast broadband policy, with the immediate aim of settling initial negotiations with potential providers,” reads the profile.
(more…)

Tags: , ,
Filed under: commerce, comms & IT, digital, economy, infrastructure, internet, national, policy, rural
10 Comments

The internet and the future: the music industry

Posted by Clare Curran on April 17th, 2011

This is the first of a series of posts on how the internet is shaping our future. Imagine if a consortium of internet companies decided to buy out the music industry.  Get rid of labels and sell music direct to consumers, cheaply. How might that change the nature of things?

Context

New Zealand’s passing of copyright law this week has sparked a fresh round of intense debate and scrutiny on how to address  the behaviour of a large number of New Zealanders on the internet who are illegally downloading music, movies and other content.

Many people either do not know they are downloading illegally or don’t feel they are doing anything wrong.

And for many, its the easiest way to get access to what they want to hear or watch.

Unfortunately,  the creators of that content (the artists) miss out on payment.  The traditional distributors of the content, the movie studios and music labels wield considerable influence in New Zealand and around the world in convincing governments to pass strict laws to prohibit filesharing. But they are slow to develop new ways to distribute their content easily and legally  to people via the internet.

But they’re not slow to use their muscle to protect their outdated business models.

What do they expect people to do? The pressure is mounting as we’re all seeing by the intense reaction to the Copyright Law this week.

What if things were to change? Would the need for such copyright laws still be necessary if people could easily, legally and cheaply access what they wanted, when they wanted it.

Consider this, an extract from a piece written by UK-based open government and open source advocate  Glynn Moody

… the music industry is economically quite small and unimportant compared to the computer industry. And yet somehow – through honed lobbying and old boy networks – it wields a disproportionate power that enables it to block innovative ideas that the online world wants to try.

On a rational basis, the music industry’s concerns would be dwarfed by those of the computer world, which is not just far larger, but vastly more important in strategic terms. But instead, the former gets to make all kinds of hyperbolic claims about the alleged “damage” inflicted by piracy on its income, even though these simply don’t stand up to analysis.

… how about if Google *did* buy the music industry? That would solve its licensing problems at a stroke. Of course, the anti-trust authorities around the world would definitely have something to say about this, so it might be necessary to tweak the idea a little.

How about if a consortium of leading Internet companies – Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, Baidu, Amazon etc. – jointly bought the entire music industry, and promised to license its content to anyone on a non-discriminatory basis?

At the very least, the idea ought to send a shiver down the spine of the fat-cats currently running the record labels, and encourage them to stop whining so much just in case they make the thought of firing them all too attractive to the people whose lives they are currently making an utter misery….

It’s quite possible this is based on Google spin. But it’s certainly interesting to contemplate. I’d like to see a major shake-up in both industries.

And I think governments have a responsiblity to ensure that consumers are able to access content: music, movies, entertainment legally and in a competive environment where they have choice and fair prices. And where there is a thriving environment for the creators (those inside New Zealand). The debate needs to be about how we make that happen. Yes?

Tags: ,
Filed under: #OpenLabourNZ, comms & IT, copyright, digital, internet
19 Comments

The Great Broadband Sell-off

Posted by David Cunliffe on March 18th, 2011

Yesterday’s FEC hearings on the Telco Amendment Bill were remarkable.

By the end of the day it was starkly obvious that the Bill hands a gold-plated license-to-kill to Telecom under the guise of ‘structural separation’.  No-one, not even Govt members, could deny that.

Don’t take my word for it: check out the Commerce Commission submission, or (bipartisan) Internet New Zealand’s, or Vector’s, or TelstraClear’s – all here.

The Bill seeks to lock in a “regulatory holiday” by preventing the Commerce Commission from exercising its current oversight for 10 YEARS.  NO other country in the world has done that, and it would be illegal in Europe. It may be in breach of NZ’s WTO obligations here.

Despite that Telecom had the gall to ask for longer! And to weaken the purpose clause of the Telco Act to boot! Have they lost their PR mind? Do they want to channel the ghost of abuses past?

Fair trading “equivalence of inputs” rules between the network owner (Telecom) and wholesale competitors would be watered down so much as to be unenforceable.  Arms-length trading rules currently in Telecom’s Operational Separation Undertakings become “optional”.

And so on.  It’s so patently obvious it is not even worth repeating all the examples.

No wonder Steven Joyce wanted the hearings over in indecent haste.

The result of this great leap backwards to the 1990’s will be much higher prices and less choice for consumers for a decade.  YOU will pay for this sleazy deal.

So WHY has the National Government done this?

Roger Douglas summed it up – it is a “legislative subsidy”: National is ‘selling the law”.

In plain speaking, National in the last election over-promised ultra-fast broadband to 75% of Kiwis for $1.5 billion.  But rather than being a clean subsidy there were massive strings attached, requiring a commercial return through the hopelessly conflicted Crown Fibre Holdings.    The numbers just did not add up.

Hence no rollout for 2½ years, and Steven Joyce is worried about his reputation.

But instead of fronting the problem honestly and getting the whole industry to be part of the solution while building a vibrant competitive market, National has done a side-deal with the incumbent telco that leaves everyone else worse off and the market beggared beyond belief.

That will set back innovation, chill investment and deliver less broadband at higher prices than necessary for a decade to come.

As if Kiwis aren’t facing enough price rises without paying too much for their broadband as well.

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: Cost of Living, Investment, Uncategorized, broadband, business, comms & IT, digital, economic, economy, finance, infrastructure, internet
12 Comments

Competition and public service

Posted by Clare Curran on March 10th, 2011

Ok. So the headline isn’t very sexy.

But why has the government bailed out Mediaworks with a $43 million low interest deferred payment for its radio spectrum licence while it appears set on axing funding for TVNZ7,  the new and vibrant young digital public channel?

I’m not having a go at Mediaworks here. They’re an important part of our media. But surely TVNZ 7; an innovation which doesn’t cost much and is tackling how to deliver dynamic Kiwi content in a low cost but accessible format is something to be nurtured. It’s ours. It’s a public service. It’s a treasure. But apparently one that’s not valued by this government.

The cuts to TVNZ 7 funding haven’t been announced yet. But it’s clear they will be and we’ll lose some of the best shows to grace our screens in recent years; Media7, Backbenchers to name a couple.

TVNZ, our supposed public broadcaster, has been clearly told to stop doing the public bit and focus solely on delivering a profit back to the government. Which it’s doing. Sort of. Though much of what it delivers us isn’t produced by Kiwis about Kiwis.

Radio NZ struggles to keep its head above water.

And we have a very big player, Sky, which has captured 50% of NZ households and is doing very nicely thank you. Which you can’t fault because they’ve had pretty much a free run for years.

What’s wrong with our broadcasting (media) industry?

It’s not rocket science to conclude that if we don’t have a competitive private sector then we don’t have healthy industry. We don’t get innovation, investment, new markets opening up, old ones dying off.

And if we don’t have a strong public service, we don’t have a healthy society. It’s why we pay our taxes. It’s the glue that binds us.

A competitive private sector and a strong public service are not mutually exclusive.

A strong modern public media is critical to a functioning democracy.

I’m in London at the moment. The BBC, Channel 4, ITV are all hugely important. Critical analysis, breaking news, quality (and some rubbish) local content. It’s all part of the mix. The Brits are pretty well served by their media.

There are some double standards at work here. And blinkers on. You can’t give a break to one part of the industry and leave another in the cold. And you need some rules. That’s why government can’t be hands off.

The problems don’t just span the last two years. Let’s be honest. But it’s time we sorted it out. Because we’ll be a poorer country without a healthy media.

Tags:
Filed under: broadcasting, comms & IT, digital, media, public services
24 Comments

What to do with your iPad

Posted by Clare Curran on February 20th, 2011

Thought those among us who have recently acquired iPads might find this useful. Was sent to me by an early adopter; one of the first in NZ to acquire the iPad.

No doubt he’s busy acquiring the next version. If he hasn’t already. He knows who he is.

Here’s some useful things to do with the iPad. No doubt I’ll get ticked off for the post being too long.

Given I’m the communications and IT spokesperson, I figure a bit of community service doesn’t go astray. Can’t be combatative and argumentative all the time.

Here’s a taste: (Note this is not my list. Click on the link above. The list goes on to include music, food, travel, entertainment, reading,science, banking, shopping…

What are the must-have iPad apps? Why?

Utilities:

News:

Hat tip: LW

NB: Twitter I already did. Flipboard is great.

Tags:
Filed under: comms & IT, digital, internet
4 Comments

Farrar deliberately a loser ?

Posted by Trevor Mallard on February 20th, 2011

As readers know Ive followed iPredict since before it launched. Interesting concept which needs a bit more development yet.

Over the last few weeks I’ve noticed some strange reactions to price changes on selected stocks and decided last night to test it out a bit.

What I’d noticed when I’d been buying stocks – especially on a Labour win in Auckland Central which on current polling is very close and certainly worth more than the 25 – 30% iPredict has been offering them at – that there appeared to be a computer generated reaction which automatically offered them for sale at a price one to two cents cheaper than the last sale.

So what is happening is that someone is deliberately selling them at less than what people are prepared to pay.

And that’s what happened twice last night.

But what was even more interesting was that I was able to marginally move one traders returns and net worth by purchasing the stocks.

You guessed it – DPF.

Farrar tops the top 100 investors in iPredict. Yet he is nowhere on the top 100 for returns.

So what does this mean?

1. Despite portraying himself as the ultimate insider, he has very little idea about politics, and never has a good hunch.

2. He doesn’t know what to do with the intel he has.

3. He is not currently trying to make money but to move the market, on his on behalf or as an agent for his employers (National Party rather than taxpayer who fund most of his income) to support certain political perceptions.

4. All of the above.

Tags: ,
Filed under: Consumer Affairs, digital, ipredict, national
37 Comments

Politics, media and the internet

Posted by Clare Curran on February 15th, 2011

Now that I’m the new spokesperson for broadcasting, there’s a few things I should say upfront:

First, thanks to Brendon Burns for his efforts in the portfolio. He and I worked well together; he’s done some fine policy work and has stood up for the craft of journalism and the ethics of public broadcasting.

Second; I believe passionately in the craft of journalism and the importance of public media.

Third: I am also the spokesperson for communications and IT. I see a rapidly changing media landscape and despite the continuing need for good journalism and content, many of the traditional institutions that provide platforms for media are struggling to survive,  dispproportionately dominate, or struggle for relevance.

The internet is the key. Whether you work in print, radio or TV, our news is rapidly being delivered via the internet, along with other content, such as music, video, movies and access to opinion and social media.

We are witnessing the rise of the citizen journalist. Blogs, facebook and Twitter are rapidly making their presence felt in how people consume information and communicate. Mainstream (traditional/old) media is struggling to adapt.

A few weeks ago I gave  a talk about politics and the internet. I said (because it’s true) that despite the crisis for many media outlets about how to adapt, the content that they produce and the craft they practice  is still vitally important.

Consider this:

The paradigm of New Media vs. old Media is now overstated.  New Media and Traditional Media need each other to survive.

Blogs still rely heavily on mainstream media for content. A recent study by the Pew research Center  found that 99% of stories linked to in blogs came from legacy outlets such as BBC, CNN, The New York Times and the Washington Post.

Two quick examples: 

The tragic events in Tuscon on 8 Jan 2011, which killed six and left Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords fighting for her life -the news broke first through Tweets, blogs and Facebook status updates. Newspapers first put their stories online and then followed with more detailed print editions. Journalists and publications joined and added to the conversation with their own Tweets and Facebook pages. Broadcast and cable TV networks broke the story simultaneously on the internet and their stations. 

And then the incredible sequence of events in Egypt, which broke on Twitter (that the Egyptian government had effectively shut down the internet) and sparked a storm of response from within Egypt, and outside. Social media was critical for spreading information,and as an organising tool, but the amazing and admirable efforts of Al Jazeera TV should not go unnoticed.

Of course there were other media outlets, including some of our own, that did a very good job.

What this tells me is that the medium is alive and kicking. It needs propelling into the new century (a decade or so late) in how it embraces new technology, and it needs support. A strong democracy needs strong, independent modern, public media. It also needs a competitive and active commercial media. In a modern context, across all media platforms.

This requires a regulatory framework which spans the traditional telecommunications and broadcasting sectors.

Quality journalism cannot be manufactured in a production line with cheap materials. It’s a product that adds value and should be nurtured and valued in any society. Governments don’t always like it, but they need it, and citizens cannot and should not be without it.

Time for change? This is an opportunity.

And the thing is, it doesn’t have to cost government a lot to make it happen.

 

Tags:
Filed under: broadcasting, comms & IT, digital, internet, journalism, media
18 Comments

No commons twits

Posted by Trevor Mallard on January 21st, 2011

Silly ruling from Westminster forbidding tweeting from the House.

I don’t twit yet but banning it doesn’t make sense.

From stuff :-

The deputy speaker of Britain’s House of Commons has asked lawmakers not to use Twitter while sitting in the chamber.

Lindsay Hoyle intervened after Kevin Brennan, a Labour lawmaker, noted midway through a debate on education that two other lawmakers there were tweeting about the debate on Twitter.

Brennan complained the lawmakers should have voiced their arguments in Parliament so other lawmakers could have a chance to rebut them, instead of making comments online.

Hoyle warned Wednesday that lawmakers should not use Twitter to update followers while they sit in the Commons.

Filed under: blogs, broadband, censorship, comms & IT, democracy, digital
17 Comments

Happy digital Christmas

Posted by Clare Curran on December 24th, 2010

I think this is an appropriate way for me to say Happy Xmas to you all. I discovered this last week but waited to post it until today as it is fitting. Kiwiblog got in first, but that’s okay.

I’m not particularly religious (though I do say the odd Hail Mary in a tight spot). But this crosses all boundaries. And is pretty cool.

Hope you all have a safe and truly happy Xmas and get to relax, and hug each other a lot (well hug the people you like).

Clare x

Hat tip: Hamish Saxton

Tags: ,
Filed under: Social media, comms & IT, digital
5 Comments

« Older Entries